Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-xbtfd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-02T19:15:40.499Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Economic Evaluation of Wyoming Big Sagebrush (Artemisia tridentata) Control Methods

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 June 2017

Myles J. Watts  and
Carl L. Wambolt
Myles J. Watts
Affiliation:
Dep. Agric. Econ. & Econ.
Carl L. Wambolt
Affiliation:
Range Sci., Moot. State Univ., Bozeman, MT, 59717
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The economic feasibility of four Wyoming big sagebrush control methods: burning, spraying with 2,4-D, plowing and seeding, and rotocutting was analyzed. Perennial grass response to big sagebrush treatment was measured to estimate a treatment response function for each control method which provided the biological informational base to develop cost and benefits. Annualized present values of net additional returns for single 2,4-D and burning treatments were $1.10/ha and $1.16/ha, respectively. When big sagebrush was retreated at optimal intervals, 2,4-D and burning generated annualized net additional returns of $2.88/ha and $2.57/ha, respectively. Rotocutting was marginally feasible, and plowing was not feasible.

Keywords

2,4-D, (2,4-dichlorophenoxy)acetic acidWyoming big sagebrush, Artemisia tridentata Nutt. ssp. wyomingensis Beetle and Young) ♯3 ARTTRBrush control valueburning big sagebrushplowing big sagebrushrotocutting big sagebrush
Type
Research
Information
Weed Technology , Volume 3 , Issue 4 , December 1989 , pp. 640 - 645
Copyright
Copyright © 1989 by the Weed Science Society of America 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Literature Cited

1. Burt, O. R. 1986. Econometric modeling of the capitalization formula for farmland prices. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 68:10–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2. Burt, O. R. 1971. A dynamic economic model of pasture and range improvements. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 53:197–205.Google Scholar
3. Calvert, P. 1987. The effect of inflation on interest rates. MS. thesis. Mont. State Univ., Bozeman.Google Scholar
4. Economic Report of the President. 1986. U.S. Gov't. Printing Office, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
5. Faustmann, M. 1849. On the determination of the value which forest land and immature stands possess for forestry. In Gane, M., ed. 1968. Martin Faustmann and the evolution of discounted cash flow. Oxford Inst. Paper 42.Google Scholar
6. Kearl, W. G., and Brannan, M. 1967. Economics of mechanical control of sagebrush in Wyoming. Wyo. Agric. Exp. Stn. Sci. Monogr. 5.Google Scholar
7. LaFrance, J. T. 1987. Instruction Manual for NONLIN. Mont. State Univ. Dep. Agric. Econ. & Econ. Staff Paper No. 87–3.Google Scholar
8. Nielsen, D. B., and Hinckley, S. D. 1975. Economic and environmental impacts of sagebrush control on Utah's rangelands: A review and analysis. Utah Agric. Exp. Stn. Res. Rep. 25.Google Scholar
9. Perrin, R. K. 1972. Asset replacement principles. Am. J. Agric. Econ. 54:60–67.Google Scholar
10. SAS Institute, Inc. 1984. SAS/ETS User's Guide. Version 5 Edition. SAS Inst. Inc., Box 800, Cary, NC.Google Scholar
11. Torell, L. A., and McDaniel, K. C. 1986. Optimal timing of investments to control honey mesquite. J. Range Manage. 39:378–382.Google Scholar
12. U.S. Forest Service. 1983. Region 1: Range analysis handbook. Amendment 21, U.S. For. Serv., Missoula, MT.Google Scholar
13. Wambolt, C. L., and Payne, G. F. 1986. An 18-year comparison of control methods for Wyoming big sagebrush in southwestern Montana. J. Range Manage. 39:314–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
14. Watts, M. J., and Johnson, J. B. 1985. The relationship of inflation to agricultural income, asset values, and firm financial analysis. Mont. State Univ., Dep. Agric. Econ. & Econ. Staff Paper No. 85–6.Google Scholar